The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER THREE RELATIONSHIPS

Introduction

3.1 As outlined in Chapter One, the survey asked several questions designed to tap the extent and character of discriminatory attitudes in respect of personal relationships. In particular we asked an extensive range of questions about how people would feel if a close relative of theirs formed a long-term relationship with someone from a particular group. We also included a number of additional questions about attitudes towards same sex relationships in particular. In both cases our questions concern relatively intimate circumstances that perhaps are more likely to evoke discriminatory attitudes.

Long-term relationships

3.2 People were asked how they would feel 'if a close relative of theirs married or formed a long-term relationship with someone' from a range of different social backgrounds (the full list is presented in Table 3.1 using the terms presented in the questionnaire). ² They could give one of five answers ranging from 'very happy' to 'very unhappy'. The results in Table 3.1 are presented in order of the proportion who say they would be unhappy or very unhappy about such a marriage or relationship (the order in which they were asked in the questionnaire is detailed in Annex B).

3.3 Feelings about whom a close relative marries or with whom they form a long-term relationship vary considerably depending on the group in question. At one end of the spectrum half (50%) say they would be unhappy about a relative forming a long-term relationship with a transsexual person (described in the survey as 'someone who has had a sex-change operation' ³). In contrast just one in ten (10%) - a difference of forty percentage points - say they would be unhappy about a relative marrying someone from a Chinese background.

Table 3.1 Feelings about long-term relationships

3.4 For many of the groups about which we asked, attitudes are not particularly discriminatory. For example, only one in ten say they would be unhappy about a relative forming a long-term relationship with someone from a Chinese background or someone who was Jewish. Meanwhile hardly any more, 11%, express unhappiness about a relative marrying or forming a long-term relationship with someone who was black or Asian. And while rather more express reservations about a relative forming a relationship with a Muslim, a Hindu ⁴ or someone who has a learning disability ⁵, in each case the proportion who say they would be unhappy is still outweighed by those who say they would be happy.

3.5 On the other hand in the case of three groups more people were unhappy than happy about the prospect of a close relative forming a long-term relationship. In addition to a transsexual person, this was also true of both an asylum seeker and a Gypsy/Traveller. Meanwhile, almost as many people said they would be unhappy as said they would be happy about a close relative forming a long-term relationship with someone of the same sex. Evidently there is widespread reluctance to see a close relative introduce someone from these groups into their family network.

How do views on relationships vary across groups in society?

3.6 How far, however, are these discriminatory attitudes more common amongst some sections of Scottish society than others? Certainly, as we would have anticipated from the previous chapter, in general those with fewer educational qualifications are more likely to express such attitudes (see Table 3.2). This, for example, is particularly true of someone forming a long-term relationship with someone of the same sex; over half (54%) of those with no qualifications say they would be unhappy about this compared with only one in five (21%) of those educated to degree or other higher education level. However, there is one group for whom educational background does not appear to make much difference. While one in five (20%) of those with no qualifications say they would be unhappy about a relative marrying or forming a long-term relationship with someone with a learning disability, so also do 16% of those with the highest level of qualifications. This may well be an indication that the character of attitudes towards someone with a learning disability is rather different than in respect of other groups.

Table 3.2 Unhappiness about long-term relationship by gender, education and religious attendance

3.7 At the same time, and in contrast to our overall measure of prejudice, there are also some sharp differences between younger and older people. As Figure 3.1 clearly demonstrates, older people are significantly more likely than younger people to exhibit a discriminatory attitude towards each of the groups, including someone with a learning disability. The difference is, again, most striking with regards to a relative forming a long-term relationship with someone of the same sex as themselves - 61% of those aged 65 and over say they would be unhappy about this compared with only 15% of the youngest age group, that is those aged 18-24. There are of course two possible explanations for this pattern. It might be that people become more discriminatory in their attitudes as they get older. Or it could be that those entering adulthood nowadays have formed different views from their elders, some of whom were born and brought up in the immediate post-war period when perhaps attitudes were very different.

Figure 3.1 Unhappiness about long-term relationship by age group

Sample sizes: 18-24 108; 65+ 396

3.8 There are also some striking differences between those who attend a religious service regularly and those who do not (see Table 3.2 again). Those who attend a religious service once a week or more are far more likely than those who do not attend at all to express unhappiness about a relative forming a relationship with someone of the same sex. As many as 52% of the former group say they would be unhappy compared with just 27% of the latter. There is also a 12 point difference between the attitudes of these two groups towards a transsexual person. In contrast, there is for the most part only a small difference between them so far as the other groups are concerned, while those who attend a religious service regularly are actually less likely than those who do not attend at all to say they would be unhappy about a close relative forming a relationship with an asylum seeker; the figures are 33% and 38% respectively.

3.9 Many religious organisations express conservative views about sexual orientation, and in a number of cases argue that same-sex relationships in particular are 'wrong'. Evidently these views are reflected to some degree amongst those who actively practise a faith. In contrast the same organisations often take a liberal stance on the position and treatment of asylum seekers, and it seems likely that on this issue too they may well have some influence on their adherents. The role of religion in the formation of discriminatory attitudes evidently depends on the group in question.

3.10 Contrary to what we might have expected from the previous chapter, there is, if anything, a tendency for women to be more likely than men to express unhappiness about the prospect of a close relative forming a long-term relationship with someone who belongs to one of our groups (see also Table 3.2). Indeed, in some cases the difference between them is statistically significant. For example 40% of women say they would be unhappy if a close relative married an asylum seeker compared with 34% of men. It may be that this difference arises because the emotional quality of relationships appears to matter more for women than it does for men (Gove et al, 1983; Knock, 1998). However, it should be remembered that even when they are significant the differences between men and women are usually small. Meanwhile, the position is actually reversed in respect of someone forming a relationship with someone of the same sex (and indeed to a lesser degree a transsexual person). On this subject, men are five points more likely than women to express unhappiness. This is probably a reflection of the common finding that in general men adopt more hostile attitudes than women towards issues of sexual orientation (Kite and Whitley, 1996; Hinds and Jarvis, 2000).

Knowledge of groups

3.11 One of the ways in which people may become less inclined to regard others as 'different' from themselves is if they are acquainted with someone from that group. Certainly in our previous research (Bromley and Curtice, 2003; see also Allport, 1955; Hewstone, 2003) we found that those who said that they knew someone who belonged to a particular group were less likely than those who did not to express a discriminatory viewpoint.

Table 3.3 Attitudes to long-term relationships by knowledge of groups

3.12 This finding is largely replicated in people's attitudes towards long-term relationships. Space constraints did not allow us to ask respondents about all of the groups listed in Table 3.1, but we did ask them whether or not they knew someone who has a learning disability, a black or Asian person, someone who is gay or lesbian, or a Muslim. As Table 3.3 shows, in each case those who said they did know such a person were less likely than those who did not to express unhappiness at the prospect of a close relative forming a long-term relationship with someone from that background. This was particularly true of those who said they knew a gay man or lesbian, who were as much as 34 points less likely to express unhappiness about a relative forming a relationship with someone of the same sex. Of course it may be the case that those with more liberal views are more inclined to get to know someone who is gay or lesbian (and vice-versa ⁶). However, it also seems to suggest that knowing a gay man or lesbian perhaps discourages discriminatory attitudes on the basis of sexual orientation.

3.13 However, we should note that once again attitudes towards those with a learning disability are somewhat different. Those who know someone with a learning disability are only six points less likely than those who do not to express unhappiness about a close relative marrying such a person. Again it appears that the character of discriminatory attitudes towards this group is somewhat different.

General attitude to prejudice

3.14 As we might expect, for the most part those who say that sometimes there is good reason to be prejudiced are usually much more likely than those who say that Scotland should get rid of all kinds of prejudice to express unhappiness about a close relative marrying someone from any of our groups (see Table 3.4). However, two points should be noted.

3.15 First, even amongst those who say that Scotland should get rid of all kinds of prejudice, well over two in five (44%) say they would be unhappy about a relative forming a long-term relationship with a transsexual person. Meanwhile around three in ten say the same about an asylum seeker (29%) or a Gypsy/Traveller (31%). This would suggest that even if people disapprove of prejudice in general they may, in certain circumstances at least, still be reluctant to see someone from one of these groups being brought into their family network. They may of course not recognise this attitude as being prejudiced or discriminatory. Or perhaps they did not have these groups in mind when they answered our more general question. However, responses suggest that opposition to prejudice in general may still be accompanied by significant evidence of a discriminatory attitude towards some groups in particular.

Table 3.4 Attitudes to long-term relationships by general attitude to prejudice

3.16 Second, attitudes towards someone with a learning disability again appear rather different. Those who say that there is sometimes good reason to be prejudiced are only five percentage points more likely than those who say all prejudice should be eliminated to express unhappiness about a relative forming a long-term relationship with someone with a learning disability. It would seem that unhappiness about the formation of such a relationship may not necessarily arise for the same reasons as it does in respect of the rest of our groups. It may be, for example, that some people feel it would be difficult to sustain a relationship with someone who has a learning disability. Others perhaps feel 'protective' towards someone with a learning disability, not least because of low expectations of what they can achieve (Grewal et al, 2002), and as a result are reluctant to expose them to what are seen as the 'risks' and 'demands' involved in forming a close relationship.

Attitudes to same sex relationships

3.17 As we noted in Chapter One, there have been some significant changes in the legal position in respect of the legal status of same sex couples. In December 2005 they obtained the right to form legally recognised civil partnerships, while the Adoption and Children (Scotland) Act 2007 will, when implemented, give same sex and unmarried mixed sex couples the right to apply to become joint adoptive parents on the basis previously only available to mixed sex married couples. As a result, we decided to retain in the survey a number of questions about same sex relationships that had been included in the 2002 survey.

3.18 First of all we asked two questions that invited respondents to state whether they thought sexual relations between people of the same sex were 'right' or 'wrong'. We did so separately about relations between two men and two women. As figure 3.2 illustrates, the two questions received almost an identical pattern of answers. Moreover, a clear majority (56% in the case of men, 57%, women) say that same sex relations are either 'not wrong at all' or only 'rarely' so. This group vastly outnumbers those who say that such relations are 'always' or 'mostly wrong' (30% and 29% respectively). Clearly there is a substantial minority who feel morally offended by same-sex relationships, but nowadays at least that feeling is not shared by a majority of people in Scotland.

Figure 3.2 Attitudes to sexual relations between people of the same sex

Sample size: 1594

3.19 Attitudes do, however, differ sharply between those in different age groups. A clear majority (57%) of those aged over 65 do believe that sexual relations between two men or between two women are always or mostly wrong (see Table 3.5). This is over three times the proportion amongst those aged 18-24 who adopt that position. Of course we should bear in mind that those aged 65 and over would have been brought up at a time when sex between two men was still illegal in the United Kingdom, and this very different generational experience may well account for their distinctive views.

3.20 Equally, the views of those who practise a religion are also distinctive. ⁷ Just over half of those who attend services and meetings connected with their religion at least once a week say that same sex sexual relations are always or mostly wrong (52% say this about sex between two men, and 53% about two women). In contrast only around a quarter of those who rarely or never attend a service do so (24% and 23%, respectively). So although opposition to people being gay may only be a view held by a minority, there are significant sections of Scottish society, including older people and those who regularly practise a religion, amongst whom such opposition is a majority view.

3.21 Meanwhile, given the discussion at para. 3.10, men are more likely than women to think that sexual relations between people of the same sex are always or mostly wrong. For example 36% of men say that sexual relations between two men are always or mostly wrong, compared with 24% of women. On the other hand, we should note that once we have taken into account someone's age, their level of educational attainment does not seem to make a significant difference to their views.

3.22 Finally, there is also a clear relationship between knowing someone who is gay and views on this matter. People who do not know someone who is gay are more than twice as likely to say that same sex sexual relationships are always wrong. While it is true that there is also a strong association between knowing a gay person and age - just under half (45%) of those aged 65 and over know someone who is gay compared with around eight in ten people aged 18-64 - knowledge is still an influence when age has been taken into account. Too few people in the younger generations do not know someone who is gay to enable us to compare their views with people who do know someone, but amongst those aged 65 and over a clear pattern exists. Just under half (47%) of those aged 65 and over who do know someone who is gay say that sex between two men is always wrong compared with 61% of those of the same age who do not know someone. The corresponding figures for sex between two women are 48% and 61%. So while generation is certainly still a very strong factor here, personal contact also appears to exert some influence.

Table 3.5 Attitudes to same-sex sexual relations by gender, age, religious attendance and whether knows a gay person

3.23 The survey also included a question about whether gay men and lesbians should have the right to marry. The question referred explicitly to marriage rather than civil partnerships for two reasons. First, doing so enabled us to ask the same question about this subject that had been included in the 2002 Scottish Social Attitudes survey ⁸ before civil partnerships had been created. Second, although the legal implications of civil partnerships and marriage are very similar, the legislation still deliberately maintained a symbolic distinction between the two in order to avoid offending the religious sensibilities of those who regard marriage as the exclusive preserve of mixed sex couples. If this presumption was correct, we would anticipate that some who might accept the right of same sex couples to form a civil partnership would reject their right to get married, and thus a question about marriage was more likely to uncover evidence of discriminatory attitudes.

3.24 In practice over half of people in Scotland (54%) say that same sex couples should have the right to marry, while only just over one in five (21%) disagree. As Table 3.6 shows, however, once again there are some sharp divisions of view between different sections of Scottish society. Only just over a quarter (28%) of those aged 65 and over agree that same sex couples should have the right to marry compared with nearly three quarters (73%) of those aged between 18 and 24. Only a third (32%) of those who attend a religious service regularly agree. Equally, only a third (34%) of those who do not know a gay man or lesbian agree, compared with three in five (60%) of those that do. Meanwhile women are more likely than men to agree (59% compared with 47%). The relationship between attitudes, knowledge and age found in relation to views on sex between people of the same sex is also evident when it comes to marriage, though the association is somewhat weaker. A third (32%) of those aged 65 and over who know someone who is gay support same sex marriage rights compared with a quarter (25%) of those who do not know someone.

Table 3.6 Attitudes to gay men and lesbians' right to marry by gender, age, religious behaviour, general attitude to prejudice and whether knows a gay person

Conclusion

3.25 Our questions about intimate relationships may be thought to have uncovered surprisingly little evidence of discriminatory attitudes. Typically only a distinct minority express unhappiness about the prospect of a relative forming a long-term relationship with someone from a minority ethnic or religious group (including a Muslim). Meanwhile, although attitudes towards same sex relationships seem more equivocal, a majority of people in Scotland see little or nothing wrong with people being gay and believe that same sex couples should have the right to marry.

3.26 On the other hand we have uncovered substantial evidence of discriminatory attitudes towards transsexual people, asylum seekers and Gypsies/Travellers. Moreover such attitudes are even quite common amongst those who generally say that prejudice should be eliminated. This may well be an indication that discriminatory attitudes towards these groups is sufficiently common that it is not regarded as an 'unacceptable prejudice' as appears to be the case in respect of most religious and ethnic minorities.

3.27 Equally, we have also uncovered some sharp differences of opinion. In particular, those who regularly practise a religion evidently are particularly concerned about same sex relationships, and probably also those involving transsexual people. A majority of older people also regard being gay as wrong. Meanwhile, there is also a general tendency for older people to be more likely to express unhappiness about the prospect of a close relative marrying someone from any of our groups. This may be an indication that those brought up in an earlier era still bear the imprint of different attitudes that were commonplace at that time. In any event these differences help explain that even when new anti-discrimination measures may be supported by a majority, they may still be the source of considerable controversy.

Key points:

• Only a minority (no more than one in four) express unease about a relative marrying or forming a relationship with someone from a different religion, an ethnic minority group, or a person with a learning disability.
• Slightly more, around one in three, would be unhappy if the person in question was an asylum seeker, Gypsy/Traveller or of the same sex.
• However, half say they would be unhappy if the prospective partner was a transsexual person.
• A majority say that sex between two people of the same sex is 'rarely wrong' or 'not wrong at all'.
• A majority (54%) agree that gay people should have the right to marry while just 21% disagree.
• Older people are more likely than younger people to express unhappiness about a prospective marriage. Equally those with fewer educational qualifications are more likely than those with more qualifications to express unhappiness.
• Those who practise a religion regularly are notably more concerned about same sex and transsexual relationships than the rest of the population.
• In general, those who know someone who belongs to a particular group are less likely to express a discriminatory attitude towards someone who belongs to that group.

« Previous | Contents | Next »